Evidence map›Paper›PMID 33435136›Full record

ArticleCurrent oncology (Toronto, Ont.)2021

Utilization and Complications of Central Venous Access Devices in Oncology Patients.

Narmeen Akhtar, Linda Lee

Open access · goldAbstract read
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Current oncology (Toronto, Ont.), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
8.1field-weighted citation impact, top 2% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

19 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 39 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Patient reported outcome and experience measures among patients with central venous access devices: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2024
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Symptomatic Deep Vein Thrombosis Associated With Peripherally Inserted Central Catheters of Different Diameters: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.Clinical and applied thrombosis/hemostasis : official journal of the International Academy of Clinical and Applied Thrombosis/Hemostasis
    Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Observational
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Canadian oncology nursing journal = Revue canadienne de nursing oncologique · 2022
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Narmeen AkhtarFaculty of Applied Health Sciences, Brock University, St. Catharines, ON L2S 3A1, Canada.
Linda LeeDepartment of Oncology, Niagara Health, St. Catharines, ON L2S 0A9, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-5630-5490
Brock University · CANiagara Health System · CA

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo describe how central venous access devices (CVADs) are utilized for ambulatory oncology patients and to evaluate the rate of complications.

methodSingle institution retrospective study of oncology patients with CVADs who received systemic treatment at the Walker Family Cancer Centre (WFCC) between 1 January and 31 December 2018.

resultsA total of 480 CVADS were placed in 305 patients, of which 408 (85%) were peripherally inserted central catheters (PICCs) and 72 (15%) were implanted vascular access devices (PORTs). The incidence of early and late complications was 9% and 24%, respectively. For the entire cohort, the rate of venous thromboembolism (VTE) was 16%, of which 9% were CVAD-related thrombosis (CRTs) and 7% were distant VTE. The CRT rates were similar for PICCs and PORTs (9% vs. 7%). A total of 6% of CVADs were complicated by infection (i.e., localized infections and bacteremia), with a total infection rate of 0.43 and 0.26 per 1000 indwelling days for PICCs and PORTs, respectively. The incidence of central line associated bloodstream infections (CLABSI) was greater for PICCs than PORTs, at a rate of 0.22 compared with 0.08 per 1000 indwelling days, respectively. The premature catheter removal rate was 26% for PICCs and 18% for PORTs. PORTs required more additional hospital visits.

conclusionsPICCs were utilized more frequently than PORTs and had a higher rate of premature removal. The rates of VTE and CRT were similar for both CVAD types. PORTs had a lower rate of infection per 1000 indwelling days. However, the management of PORT related complications required more visits to the hospital and oncology clinic.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Central VenousCatheterization, PeripheralCentral Venous CathetersNeoplasmsHumansRetrospective Studiescentral venous access devicescomplicationsimplanted vascular access deviceinfectionsperipherally inserted central cathetervenous thromboembolism

Identifiers

PMID33435136
PMCPMC7903275
OpenAlexW3119594325

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.